It will come as a surprise to some people, but here in the United Kingdom we have something called 'freedom of speech'. Mmm, I know it's hard to believe given the actions and activities of Blair's junta over the last seven years. Maybe in the future New Labour will abolish the hitherto inalienable right of people in Britain to air their opinions. Come to that, they way this shower of sh*te operates, we seem well on course for the abolition of of Britain per se. But for now, freedom of speech and expression it is a sanctity that should be fought for and defended.
Whatever the political incorrectness of the following opinion, it remains the case that many, many people perceive members of the Asian community to be unwilling to adhere to UK customs and way of life. Notwithstanding their appalling lack of desire to integrate into a society they have no problem in populating in substantial numbers, Asians are viewed as a 'culture within a culture': blessed with an aspiration to live by their rules and their standards in a country where such a position is, in the long-term, totally unsustainable.
Take the shenanigans outside the Repertory Theatre in Birmingham last evening, for example. A play was interrupted by a mass brawl of ignorant and indignant Sikhs who claimed the theme of the performance was insulting to their religion. Even if that was the case, so the hell what!!! When I went into HMV in Bradford last year to purchase my DVD copy of Monty Python's Life of Brian, was I harangued by marauding hoards of Christian fundamentalists, anxious to drag me into the street for a session of physically torturing atonement? Absolutely not!!! Part of living in the UK is an acceptance of our ability to say and do things in the name of free speech. If members of the Asian community (or anyone else for that matter) cannot grasp this reality, they should in future consider settling in another part of the world.
Andrew, ATW recently criticised Madame Tussauds for a Christmas exhibition which portayed the increasingly ludicrous Beckhams as Mary and Joseph.
So it seems that for you it's ok to insult the Sikhs but not the Christians?
I saw the Life of Brian in Bangor (Belfast City Council refused to give it a licence) when it came out in the early 1980's. We had to walk past a Free Presbyterian picket outside the cinema.
I'm an atheist, so I don't care about religions being criticised. But it should be all or none.
Posted by: Peter | December 19, 2004 at 11:45 PM
Indeed Peter, a good point. People have the right to protest, as long as they don't frighten or threaten.
Posted by: Howard | December 19, 2004 at 11:59 PM
The Sikhs that I know of in America are pretty cool. Peace loving - live and let live - America supporting. Perhaps they are afraid? Very, very afraid?? I hope that's not it - but who knows?
Posted by: Monica-Philadelphia | December 20, 2004 at 05:04 AM
BTW - I agree that brawling is not demonstrating peaceably.
Posted by: Monica-Philadelphia | December 20, 2004 at 05:05 AM
Interesting discussion. Brawling and intimidation are wrong but I also agree it is right to publicly object to anything you want - and that religions cannot expect to be given a bye.
I also remember going to see the Life of Brian and running the Free P. gamut. In my case, this was worse as I am a Free P!
Posted by: David Vance | December 20, 2004 at 08:12 AM
Peter
The difference is I didn't go to London and cause £4,000 worth of damage to Madame Tussauds. I was offended and got over it. Why can't they do the same?
Posted by: Andrew McCann | December 20, 2004 at 09:25 AM
I agree with Andrew and David. People have the right to express opposition to something that offends them but not to demand censorship. I wonder if the new incitement to religous hatred laws currently going through parliament could be used to stop plays like this.
Posted by: colm | December 20, 2004 at 11:07 AM
Another difference is that the Tussauds exhibition poked deliberate fun at Christ whereas this performance does not seek to take the rise out of Guru Nanak.
Posted by: Andrew McCann | December 20, 2004 at 02:40 PM
Andrew
I don't see how the Tussaud's exhibition poked fun at Christ, in fact it didn't make any comment at all about the Christian faith. All it did was superimpose it's celebrity artefacts into a nativity scene demonstration. It's up to the viewer to make of it what they wish. Unlike the Islamic faith, Christianity has never had any problem with image making and the nativity scene has been depicted in thousands of ways.
As to the topic in question, I read on the BBC online that the theatre in Birmingham has scrapped the play. A victory for violence and hypocritical intolerant bigots, and a defeat for a free society.
Posted by: colm | December 20, 2004 at 04:03 PM
Impersonation equalled blasphemy in this case, Colm.
Posted by: Andrew McCann | December 20, 2004 at 04:47 PM
Which is exactly the point I was making.
You and many others may have seen this as a blasphemous attack on the Christian religion, but it wasn't explicitly stated as such. To me it was nothing more than a seasonal advert of Madam Tussaud's exhibits, admittedly crass but not intended by it's makers as a negative critique of the christian faith.
It may seem baffling to say this but Christians should actually be proud that the humanistic, tolerant and open minded development of their religous faith in western societies allows such supposedly 'sacrilegous' manifestations as the Tussaud's exhibition without it's creators being burned at the stake. It's called respecting true freesom. It's something the muslims (and sadly now the Sikh's too) should learn.
Posted by: colm | December 20, 2004 at 05:03 PM